Lon Anderson Op-ed on the "War on Drivers"

It has two parts, and I've put the second, non-bike part below the fold

DC's War on Motorists
by Mahlon G. "Lon" Anderson
Managing Director, Public and Government Affairs,
AAA Mid-Atlantic

At AAA Mid-Atlantic, we understand that a vibrant city like Washington
needs to have a healthy mix of bikers, walkers, mass transit users and motorists,
and that finding the right balance is always difficult. We also understand
that motorists need to pay for the services they use.

That said, recently the District government, and Mayor Adrian Fenty's
budget in particular, have made it clear that it's war on motorists, and that's a
huge concern to us and our over 80,000 DC AAA members. The "war" is best
illustrated on two fronts: the budget and the bicycle proposals. Let's look at the
budget issues first.

[snip]

But, at the same time, DC is moving aggressively to
take lanes away from cars and convert them to bicycle ways (15th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue for starters).

Our city is already struggling with its congestion for several reasons:

· The loss of so many alleys that used to be available for deliveries.
So now, many delivery trucks just double and triple park in our roadways,
snarling our streets daily.
· Increased security has meant lanes, roads and parking spaces have all
been taken away around federal buildings because of the terror threat.
Remember when Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House was a busy national
boulevard carrying 29,000 vehicles a day?
· Continued growth in vehicle traffic, especially as the economy
rebounds and business and residential revitalization in the city continues.
· Likely further loss of lane space to trolleys that will be installed.
FYI, I am a big trolley fan and spent the last day they operated in DC riding
the rails with my grandmother, who boldly predicted that "Washington will rue the
day it ended this service."

So, in a region that already has the second worst commute in the nation, according to the Texas Transportation Institute's latest study, we are
going to further shrink highway capacity for cars and trucks and hand it over to bicycles? Is it realistic to think that, at a time when the residents of
Beijing are hanging up their bicycles for cars by the thousands every day, that
our residents are going to hang up their cars for bicycles en masse?

So, there you have some of my top concerns about motorists and mobility
from my perspective at AAA Mid-Atlantic, and as a life long resident of the
region. I will enjoy hearing your thoughts!

Most of his complaint is about other things that have caused congestion, only one of which is the District's doing, and one of which (streetcars) he thinks will cause congestion, but probably won't.

Then he's wrong about shrinking highway capacity. Pennsylvania Avenue, NW is not a highway. Then he gets off on some crazy tangent about how people in Beijing are driving more, as if that is somehow analogous. In almost every city in America, and every city in this region, people are hanging up their cars (or at least parking them) for their bicycles. Bike commuting has doubled in the last 8 years in DC.

All he has is a concern that bike lanes on Penn and other streets will cause congestion when DDOT has models and evidence that they will not. Does it really make sense to cancel bike lanes that can be used 24 hours a day, seven days a week for a fourth lane that probably isn't used more than 10 hours a week?

This is not a war on drivers, it is a policy of making the roads safer for all users.

I held a press conference recently down at Freedom Plaza in front of the
Wilson Building to protest the budget and its huge reliance on motorists'
penalties and fees. I also had two ANC leaders with me to echo our concerns. And
having support from ANC leadership was new for us, but it brings home a
reality. For years DC government has raised fees on motorists and driving violations
and has been able to convince residents that the burdens fell on the other
guys—the drivers from Virginia and Maryland. The ANC leaders were at the press
conference to say, "not so" and that their constituent--DC residents--are
shouldering a lot of these costs.

Here are a few of the fee hikes that have caused me to call motorists
DC's newest ATM machine:

· Increase fines for 71 moving violations, such as "speeding, running a
red light, running a stop sign, turning from the wrong lane and passing a
stopped school bus." If adopted, the higher fines would raise $28 million during
the next budget cycle.

· Expand the use of speed and red-light cameras to generate an
additional $16 million in revenue.

· Increase parking meter fees for the second consecutive year, and in
certain areas increase curb-side rates to $3 per hour to raise an additional
$3.6 million. (Let's not forget that parking tickets will likely net over
$100 million alone.)

Critics, including Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners Douglass Sloan,
ANC 4B and Kelvin Robinson, ANC 6A, say the budget proposal undermines public
and traffic safety, lessens confidence in local government and law
enforcement efforts, targets drivers, threatens tourism and angers District
residents. It is likely more drivers and residents will go to traffic court to fight the
fines and fees.

Certainly a major concern about attempting to balance the budget on the
backs of motorists needs to involve the potential harm to local businesses and
tourism.
Again, quoting from our press release:

"The danger is, this tactic could backfire and hurt the city's tourism
and hospitality industry, which generated more than $5.5 billion in visitor
spending in 2007, `representing $620 million in new tax dollars' for the District
that year," Anderson explained. "Most years, the nation's capital area
attracts more than 15 million visitors. Now watch this. Approximately 59 percent of
them are here for leisure. Amazingly, 74 percent of leisure travelers drive to
the District and 74 percent of them stay here overnight. The District might
be killing the goose that lays the golden egg."

So now, I hope, you understand my concern about DC's turning motorists
into its latest ATM machine.

Lon Anderson makes about as much sense as Lyndon LaRouche, but he's way better at getting press.

He's constantly in the news whining about some transportation issue and usually does it by taking the most extreme position possible.

He certainly does not seem concerned with finding consensus or tackling difficult issues constructively. He is not about finding solutions. The guy's like an SUV plowing down the highway at 95 mph. No concern for others on the road.

What really bugs me is the fallacy that cyclists slow down drivers. Its not true. More infrastructure for cyclists leads to more cyclists and fewer cars. Once in a while drivers get stuck behind a bike, but the vast majority of the time they drive around the bike. More bikes = fewer cars = faster trips by car. How do you argue with that?

I am a AAA member. I own a car. But I am also a cyclist and I commute to work (Falls Church to D.C.) nearly every day year-round. "War on Motorists"? You have got to be kidding.

If a bike lane is a war on motorists, are highways a war on cyclists?

Providing some bike lanes is hardly, as you state, "shrinking highway capacity." Since when is Pennsylvania Avenue a highway? 15th Street? Please.

Studies show that bike lanes reduce congestion. Every bike on the road is one less car. Encouraging cycling leads to more bikes, fewer cars, and less congestion. Whether I am riding my bike on the Custis Trail or the C&O canal (my usual commute routes), I am not contributing to traffic on Route 66 or Canal Drive. Amazingly, while you complain about congestion caused by other things, you do not acknowledge that bikes actually reduce congestion.

Comparing D.C. to Beijing? Give me a break. You know that's a red herring. No one claims everyone will switch to riding a bike. But for everyone who does, there will be one less car on the road. (You seem to think it's good when folks in Beijing switch from bikes to cars. I think it safe to say that Beijing is about to experience an increase in congestion, not to mention obesity and heart disease.)

If AAA really thinks bikes are so bad, why is it a sponsor of Bike to Work Day?

Most offensive, your equating bike lanes with a supposed "War on Motorists" is incendiary. Cyclist have enough problems with those motorist (a minority) that think cyclists do not belong on the road and are fair game for cars. I hope you don't ascribe to that school of reasoning, but whether you do or don't, your choice of language certainly suggest that you (and AAA) do. As a AAA member, and a bike commuter who just wants to get to work and home safely every day, I expect better from AAA.

I gotta wonder about the other side of this... multi-modal people who drive sometimes, bike sometimes and take transit sometimes, seem to rightly see Mr. Anderson's comments as insane, and those of us who are AAA members are looking for alternatives. On the flip side, I wonder, are there commuters in Loudoun, Prince George's, Fairfax and Charles Counties, reading this and thinking to themselves: "Bravo, Lon! You're saying what we've all been thinking. I'm definitely renewing my AAA membership now!"? I would like to believe not. But, I guess so, or else it wouldn't make sense for him to say these things.

In that case, those who remain AAA Mid-Atlantic supporters will become more and more extreme in their views... kind of like the Republican Party.

Kornheiser - to "lightly tap" a bicyclist with a motor vehicle. Dude, did you see that jerk totally Kornheisered me!

Lon Anderson - to spout extreme, unsubstantiated, ignorant opiniones that nonetheless gain traction with large segments of the population. Our plan to see the Pink Floyd concert was called off after Tom Lon-Andersoned the idea by saying that they totally suck.

Scott F, I agree. Lon Anderson is doing what AAA does, advocate the position of drivers. That position, as he sees it, is to build more roads, provide free parking and lightly enforce traffic laws. As Kids in the Hall put it, "you don't hate a shark for killing. That's what sharks do." But it is bothersome that the media doesn't see it that way.

But that's not all AAA does. They also provide roadside assistance and guidebooks for people traveling the country. That's why most people are members, not advocacy.

So it's not hard to imagine that AAA's image as an opponent of every mode of transportation that isn't the car, could be a net loss for them. Not too many people, I suspect, are joining for the advocacy, and it's driving some of us -- members who also bicycle -- away.

I dunno. It may be wishful thinking, but I kinda think Lon is ultimately shooting himself in the foot. (And he does open by saying he favors a balanced transportation system, but the arguments against bicycles contradict this, so one wonders who he expects to fool.) I won't renew my AAA membership.

FWIW, when I used the term "Kornheisered" the other day on my Facebook page - as in I "was nearly Kornheisered on my commute home tonight" - it prompted a discussion on the use of that term, and it was largely agreed that "Kornholed" was a better term.

There seems to be a bit of 'cognitive dissonance' with AAA. Everyone should follow the law, including bikes. However, when motorists break the law, the fines are "DC's turning motorists into its latest ATM machine."

I grew up in the NoVA/DC area and spent as much time (or more) on a bike than I did in a car.

IMO, AAA may be missing the boat here. Rather than trying to stop/delay/interfere with the proposed bike lands, perhaps than should consider offering a service to cyclists similar to that offered to its motorist members. I imagine more than a few cycle commuters would pay for the roadside assistance option should something happen to them during their morning ride.

So why should I give a f*** about ANC4B, except for the fact that I live in it or ANC6A, which under Joe Fengler was great, and now must be going back to the sucking level, about downtown transportation issues?

What is it about their knowledge and skill that makes these positions either fact-based or relevant?